With many things we use it already happens, such as bike parts, software,
recipes. They go through a process of engineering/development/evolution over
time (though guided by us, unlike in nature). Of course the M&M breeding is
simply someone choosing to apply their own criterion to their candy that was
not the evolutionary criterion applied by the company that made them. So the
question is what evolutionary criterion do you want applied to everyday things
that so far tend not to be.

Say if you buy a hardback book, you either want it as soon as it is available
or you need another device with which to cause injury to others. Try hitting
someone with the book if they stay conscious you need to find sturdier
books. Of course it really is pretty cool when scientists and engineers
redefine their work such that they look for something with different
qualities/goals (or get lucky and discover something awesome they were not
looking for).

This seems to be an ongoing failure in modern research funding, with a
goal/result oriented funding appearing world wide often, if people can not
research all manner of things in their field of interest we are less likely to
have the accidental discoveries that so often change history. Though funding
experts in the field to research their interests works, as is pointed out in
this
list
of 10 accidental discoveries, "That's the genius behind all these
accidental inventions - the scientists were prepared. They did their science
on the brink and were able to see the magic in a mistake, set-back, or
coincidence."

Good to see M&M recognised this, gave the man a bag of M&M's and let
him get on with his research.